Douglas (not verified) says:

My suggestion that the Economist editors are more persuasive because they used to predict permanent Republican hegemony was not meant as a testimonial to their accuracy -- only that they seem to have learned something from their mistakes...

Their mistake of being wrong? I suppose it's always good to learn not to be wrong! And, of course, now that they predict the resurgence of the Democrats, they're right! Hardly, a daring prediction given the current political climate - but this, too, will be fleeting - and this author and the author of this op-ed know this to be true.

The Democrats dominated for 40 years (1954 to 1994) and achieved virtually everything they set out to achieve. But instead of acting like winners, they continued to whine incessantly about America's shortfalls. This, of course, set the stage for the resurgence of the Republican Party which began in 1981 with Ronald Reagan. And continues even with current poll numbers being where they are.

Most Democrats I know can't stand to hear any good news about Iraq for fear they will melt or something - it is bizarre that any Party would stakes its future on America losing.

Reply

The content of this field is kept private
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><br> <p> <i> <b> <embed> <img> <blockquote> <span> <strikethrough> <u>
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

By checking this box you are giving permission for Observer staff to contact you to obtain contact information and permissions required for publication.